Sunday, 24 April 2022

Power - Prof Scott Galloway

 

Do you follow Prof Scott Galloway?  

In his extraordinarily insightful writing are pieces of wisdom: on dealing with people and events.  
The latest from his pen, Power, is, even by his exalted standards, a superb piece of writing. 

What I do below is to excerpt some of what is written in there, providing a reference to our decisions and biases (and opinions of ourselves....

Partners compensate for our weaknesses, encourage us to take risks, and (in a healthy relationship) have the strength to tell us when we’re doing something wrong, unfair, or just plain stupid. Good partners protect you from others; great partners protect you from yourself. Everyone needs counterweights. Indeed, the more weight you carry, the more you need others to balance you. Some of the most valuable advice I get isn’t about what to do, but what not to do. I’ve done so many dumb things in my life. But a number of 15-car-pile-ups have been averted because someone said, “Hey, maybe … don’t.”

There is a crucial, crucial distinction here: between difference of opinion and conflict. Many believe (and teach) that conflict is inevitable.  It is not.  Differences of opinion are inevitable and, if you keep time aside to listen with respect, what is guaranteed is this: learning.  I promise you, I believe in this.  

Scott: 
Some entrepreneurs achieve enormous success within this system, balancing leadership and consensus. And with great success comes great power — the power to stop listening. Which often results in a fall from grace and loss of power.
...and power dulls you to risk...a drug that downplays costs and magnifies rewards. People with power are psychologically more inclined to act on their instincts than those without it.

So, how do we protect ourselves from, well, ourselves?
By creating a system of checks or 'guardrails', as he calls them.  Read on for a fuller education.....

 

Tuesday, 5 April 2022

Do you see blue?

 
Imagine that a town has only 2 colours of car: 85% are blue and 15% are green.  A person witnesses a hit-and-run and says that he saw a green car.  If it is known that witnesses identify the colour of cars correctly 80% of the time, what are the chances that the car is actually green?
 
Did you look at this question, have a smirk (or, ok…a smile) and then say, “Caught you!  The answer is 80%” ?
Well, I did.
 
This is a fabulous example of a fallacy in statistics (and in making decisions) called The Base Rate Fallacy: my brain ignored all the statistical information (or base rate) and focused instead on specific information on the witness. 
 
So, let’s solve it:
If we randomly selected 100 cars, 85 would be blue and 15 would be green, right?
Since the witness gets the colour right 80% of the time:
-       he will identify 12 cars correctly (80% of 15 green cars)
-       he will also identify 17 cars wrongly (20% of the 85 blue cars!)
 
So, his error rate is a massive 17/29, which is 59%
…and the hit rate is just 41%.
 

The base rate fallacy can show up in our understanding of many issues (or, to be more precise, our lack of understanding of many issues) including infections.


Caller Tune

  I am in a meeting with someone when his phone rings. “Please take the call, it’s not a problem for me,’ I say.  He looks at the name on th...